Despite an opening rant on scandalous or shadowy corporate operations, the
Stress Doc cautions not to forget the survivors of the streamlinings and
mergers. Part I of this two-part series focuses on five micro and macro
reorganizational strategies.

Five Macro and Micro Strategies for Post-Enron Reorganization

A Stress Doc Survival Guide: Part I

As the parade of corporate scandals increasingly lengthens, and the numbers
on the sidelines waving bye to their stock options, 401Ks, savings and
livelihoods increases, let's try a positive spin. Perhaps these CEOs were
motivated less by criminal greed and more for the common good. It's well known
that Americans have a decided problem with obesity. Despite all the downsizing
and consolidating, rightsizing and frightsizing of the past and present, maybe
the troops were still not sufficiently "lean-and-mean." Well Enron and Arthur,
World.com and Martha…thank you. With our wallets shrunk, if not our waistlines,
I believe many of us now are finally "lean-and-MEAN."

And whatever the economic context for this corporate crisis -- whether
dimensions global or criminal, irrational exuberance of investors or plain
mismanagement of decision-makers -- simply ranting about corporate execs as a
solution only goes so far. (Though let's not minimize the pleasure and, at
least, short-term stress relief from skewering criminally greedy, arrogant and
hyperinflated egos.) Whether involved in a merger or reduction in force we still
have employees and the organization as a whole in serious need of assistance
during this turbulent transition. So strategies and steps for reorganizational
survival are critical if productivity, coordination and morale are to eventually
rebound. And one of the most important survival structures for repairing the
doubt and disconnect between individual and organization, between employees and
management is the work team.

Part I of this series will focus on five systemic and individual
reorganizational survival elements – from the realities of downsizing to the
strategic use of Employee Assistance Programs and OD Consultants. While more
oversight in the corporate boardroom is needed, for example, some advocate
making sure the CEO is not the Chairman of the Board, and that the latter have
genuine scrutiny over the former, Part II focuses more on the relationship
between top management, supervisors and employees. The article lists five
strategies that illuminate how the team can become the nucleus for grieving and
healing and the rebuilding of trust by: a) recognizing the loss of key personnel
and integrating new team players, practices, emotional processing, etc., b)
developing a more inclusive team decision-making process, c) coordinating new or
modified working relationships in teams and departments and d) and
interconnecting departments and divisions throughout the organization so all
have a better sense of and commitment to the newly evolving big picture.

System-Element Survival Strategies

Let's begin with five macro-micro problem setting and strategies; some begin
in anticipation (or in denial) of an impending restructuring:

1. Recognizing Reorganizational Uncertainty. With an organizational
climate of mistrust, it may be difficult for all the worker munchkins and low-
and mid-level managers at OZ Corp. to know what degree of control the highest
execs, like the Wizard, actually have and what's just reorganizational smoke and
mirrors. Based on consulting experience, I'm aware of so many external factors,
for example, Congress for federal agencies, IT meltdowns and the loss of the tax
revenue base for state governments, or globalization issues for corporations,
etc., that cloud the reorganizational picture of who's the real captain of the
company ship when navigating such turbulent waters.

In this amorphous, uncertain and doubting environment, some employees don't
want to focus on precarious possibilities; they shut down critical thinking or,
even, push themselves to exhaustion. They work harder and harder to prove their
"essential" status. Others, feeling like "pawns" try to battle their anxiety and
sense of helplessness while establishing some control by cranking up the old
mill. Not surprisingly, in this shadowy climate, with the fear of losing jobs or
work hours, the rumor mill often goes into overtime.

Those at the top often make two mistakes, one an error of omission, the other
of commission. First, management often does not institute workshops on loss and
change that would formally allow employees and supervisors to vent about and
better grapple with current conditions. The second error, though not always
pre-meditated, is passing along information not grounded in first-hand
observation or fact. While this sharing is meant to be reassuring (not simply
for defusing anger toward management; let's not be cynical) or at least to help
other's see the glass as half empty and half full, such information only fuels
rumor-mongering. This is akin to a visually ambiguous projection test triggering
multiple interpretations by viewers. Also, some staff may think that by sharing
such fanciful information, management takes employees for fools.

What is clear is that these mistakes and missed opportunities can ravage
long-term trust and loyalty. When it comes to transmission, better for key
decision-makers and information gatekeepers to share less but more substantive
data. This directive holds even if the only honest and affirmative statement is,
"At this time, I don't know what's going on or what this really means." Truth in
reorganizing should not be as dubious as truth in advertising!

2. Being Down and (Breaking) Out. In the early '90s restructuring rumors
were flying at the US Postal Service, especially at headquarters and nearby
facilities in the Metro-DC area. Still the prevailing attitude was: "We are
always going through changes (in operation. No big deal." Alas, what was not
foreseen was that Carvin Marvin Runyon was brought in wielding a decidedly
"cutting edge" Postmaster General axe. Nationwide, within a year, troop size was
reduced by 50,000.

Two categories of employees seemed to survive best the tumultuous transition:

a) the kick-started entrepreneur. I recall one employee declaring he
could no longer put all his financial and career security eggs in the postal
basket. He had been contemplating starting his own seafood business for years,
while doing nothing tangible. Now he was definitely pissed and, perhaps, soon to
be RIFfed Off (RIF = Reduction In Force). While not planning to leave the USPS
presently, the downsizing was a "kick in the butt" to disprove that his
entrepreneurial vision was not just a hallucination.

b) the back to schooler. Another group of folks who saw the
opportunity in problems rather than a problem of reduced opportunity were those
who decided to go outside for schooling or for additional in-house training.
These steps would make them more marketable, provide more flexibility for
landing on their feet when the downsizing dust settled…whether inside or out of
the Postal Service. (As an aside, while writing the first draft of this article
at Teaism, my tea house sanctuary, a fellow at the next table mentioned that in
a company downsizing, one person wrangled a leave of absence to work on a novel.
In general, I wouldn't count on this option.)

3. Setting Boundaries. For the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), already
beset by multiple downsizings in the last few years, post-9/11 has meant you "do
even more with less." During a recent Practice Safe Stress Program with the DIA,
I was emphasizing the importance of "N & N" - the ability to say "NO" and to
"Negotiate" - in light of how "burnout is less a sign of failure and more that
we give ourselves away." A mature woman interrupts, challenging my philosophy:
"My boss doesn't want to discuss priorities and time factors; he just wants it
when he wants it!" The woman briefly listed various ways she's tried to reason
with or please her supervisor…without success.

Intently outlining the burnout stages, I was taken aback by her mid-stage
declaration. Suddenly, out of the murmuring void, a voice of clarity. A woman,
perhaps in her 50s, with years at the agency, said, "I used to have this
problem, trying to please my boss; staying till seven or eight almost every
night. Eventually, I started getting sick." This wakeup call led to: a) pushing
aside her reservations about standing up to authority and b) a serious "N & N"
with her supervisor. The result: more control of her work schedule, less stress
and improved health, not to mention greater confidence and self-esteem. I
affirmed the survival wisdom. The extra-ordinary (occasionally staying till
eight or coming in on a weekend, unless you choose to do so more frequently)
must not become the ordinary (or routinely expected).

a) EAP as Employee Ally. Talk to an Employee Assistance Program
counselor or seek private counseling or coaching. The EAP option has several
advantages: 1) with your permission, an EAP counselor can speak to your
supervisor. This counselor can also facilitate conflict mediation between the
antagonistic parties, 2) if discovering that you are not the only disaffected
team member, the counselor can suggest a team meeting with the supervisor, with
or without an EAP presence. (Several employees from a team or department using
EAP services will eventually get management's attention, especially when going
on company time.) If the level of trust and degree of openness between employees
and a supervisor is compromised, outside facilitation is needed.

b) Call on OD Consultant. Sometimes Human Resources or, even, the EAP
(often for confidentiality reasons) will recommend an outside
consultant/facilitator. Another consideration is having an "objective" third
party with no employment ties to the organization, that is, not simply a
(perceived) management mouthpiece. Separate identity and sense of integrity are
vital in this intervention role. (The Stress Doc is tested, rested and ready to
roll. His motto: "Have Stress? Will Travel: A Smart Mouth for Hire!")

c) EAP/Consultant as Supervisor Ally. Finally, supervisors need to use
the EAP not simply as a referral option for troubled or troublesome individuals.
The best supervisors are those who seek out the EAP Counselor (or an EAP- or
HR-referred consultant) for approaches in handling a difficult employee or
complex team issue. The worst response by a supervisor is denying or downplaying
the adverse effects of a slacker on his or her colleagues. Simply encouraging or
expecting others to ignore a "stress carrier" heightens team members' anger and
anxiety. ("Will this carrier explode or implode? Will I be hurt by the fallout?"
Will a borderline employee have the chance to pull a knife on a new supervisor
partly because the supervisor's boss downplayed the violence potential of the
employee?) Now both dysfunctional employee and dysfunctional supervisor become a
tumor, inevitably eroding morale and productivity of the unit.

5. Following the Way of the Acronyms. Consider these two acronyms to
bolster survival capacity during these trying transitional times:

a) Balancing The Triple "A". To affirm an employee's sense of
professionalism and sense of responsibility, blend "The Triple 'A': Authority,
Autonomy and Accountability." Management must recognize and support an
employee's utilization of skills and knowledge, and the desire to have input in
relevant decision-making ("Authority"). Workers also want some control of their
turf, time frames, tools and operating procedures ("Autonomy"). At the same
time, employees must accept the objective and timely review of their work
performance. Alas, with all the "Accountability" scandals at the top, I wonder
if employees, in noticeable numbers, will start challenging a manager's right to
one-dimensionally grade their work quality and quantity.

b) Investing in Organizational IRAs. When people are chronically doing
more with less, don't assume they will be (or should be) grateful just having a
job in a tight economy. A management team that's concerned about motivation and
loyalty or, at least, about the longevity of workplace survivors, makes sure
people can earn those IRAs: Incentives, Recognition & Rewards and Advancement
Opportunities, including opportunity for needed and desired training.

Part I has identified five macro-micro, organizational-individual strategies
and structures for broadly managing the shock and subsequent fallout of a
disruptive reorganization. These are: 1) Accepting Reorganizational Uncertainty,
2) Being Down and (Breaking) Out, 3) Setting Boundaries, 4) Seeking Outside Help
and 5) Following the Way of the Acronyms. Part II will enumerate five specific
team interventions for rebuilding and bonding within the team or departments and
for subsystems across the organization as a whole. Hopefully, Parts I and II
will heal wounds and regenerate individual, team and organizational energy and
spirit while enabling all to…Practice Safe Stress!

Building on the broad reorganizational strategies as outlined in Part I, the
final segment examines five strategies for the work team as nucleus for
grappling positively with disruptive change, a setting for grieving and healing
and for the rebuilding of trust and productivity.

Five Team Building Strategies for Post-Enron Reorganization

A Stress Doc Survival Guide: Part II

Part I of this series (SD News: JUL02) focused on five systemic structural
and individual intervention elements for surviving an uncertain reorganization
or downsizing. Part II focuses on the relationship between top management,
supervisors and employees as well as departments or branches. The article lists
five strategies that illuminate how the team can become the nucleus for grieving
and healing and the rebuilding of trust by: a) recognizing the loss of key
personnel and integrating new team players, practices, emotional processing,
etc., b) developing a more inclusive team decision-making process, c)
coordinating new or modified working relationships in teams and departments and
d) and interconnecting departments and divisions throughout the organization so
all have a better sense of and commitment to the newly evolving big picture.

1. Team Meeting Paradigm Shift. Transforming a typical supervisor-driven
team meeting into a gradual team building process doesn't require the group
going on some touchy-feely retreat or participating in some formulaic or chaotic
(that is, leaderless) TQM training program. With a little advanced coaching and
group training along with some operational shifts, a team can become a catalyst
for improved coordination, morale and productivity. Consider these hands on
strategies:

a) Staff Facilitation -- have staff members replace the supervisor as
meeting facilitator every 4-8 weeks (assuming the team meets once or
twice/week).

b) Two Hats Phenomenon - another shift involving both style and
substance is having the supervisor or department head wear two hats: as much as
possible, in the meeting this individual is team player first and management
representative second. Surely, letting up on the authority reins may be a
challenge for some managers. However, this shift can be initially uncomfortable
for other team members as well. Employees who are used to deferring to authority
or who don't want to risk being open with ideas and beliefs will have a steeper
learning curve. Also, across the organizational hierarchy, there are individuals
reluctant to assume responsibility for making decisions and being held
responsible for outcomes. Such a perceptual and procedural shift requires trust
and, like the phenomenon of trust, will evolve or erode over time.

c) Try a Controlled and Safe Experiment -- when contemplating
innovation, establishing a time-limited pilot project often allows various
parties, especially the authority figures, i.e., supervisors, managers, division
directors, etc., a sense of some control with an uncertain change process.

Another useful safety feature is having a team-building consultant be a
facilitator/role model for the first two or three "participatory" meetings. I
recall helping an IT team at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with this
process. Initially, the supervisor and team members were overly focused on my
direction (and, perhaps, my approval). The analogy used was trying to teach them
to ride a two-wheeler. At first, they didn't want me to let go of the bike seat.
In fact, I wound up playfully hiding under the conference table so that the
participants could not make eye contact with me, only surfacing if I thought
they were wildly off course. Gradually, and more steadily, the group process
began to cruise, this time hardly noticing my presence when I resurfaced.

2. Build In a Wavelength Segment. In a "lean-and-MEAN" climate, not
surprisingly, most meetings -- from team and department to branch and division
-- are short fused if not "T & T" -- "Time and Task"-driven. So while the above
recommendations open up the process, the content is often still exclusively
focused on goals and objectives, timelines and deadlines and outcomes and return
on investment issues. Which makes sense; there's a business or organization to
run. My recommendation calls for carving out ten or fifteen minutes at the end
of the meeting - the "Wavelength Segment." A group member comfortable with group
process initially facilitates the meeting. Then, as noted above, as experience
and trust builds the role of facilitator can be rotated.

Three purposes of the "Wavelength" are:

a) Relationship Check - this closing segment focuses on how members
are relating with each other; it considers any barriers to communication and
cooperation bypassed in the "T n T" section of the meeting. Group members are
encouraged to vent appropriately frustrations related both to team operations
and between the team/department and the larger organizational environment, e.g.,
other departments, executive boards, etc. Whenever possible, the manager in
tandem with team reps should push up the organizational ladder issues generated.

b) Peer Recognition - in addition, "the wavelength" is also a time and
place for recognizing individual and group efforts that have heightened morale
and/or productivity.

c) Restore Trust - finally, perhaps most important, the wavelength is
designed to restore trust, especially between a supervisor or manager and team
members. Based on my broad organizational experience there is often a fear of
speaking up (the chain of command). This fear is fueled by the prospect of being
judged negatively, being retaliated against in a performance evaluation or
blocked from fulfilling one's career path. Such restricted, if not repressive,
environment does as much to stifle morale and induce burnout while undermining
initiative and innovation as any other toxic elements or hazardous workplace
conditions.

3. Plan Informal Gatherings. In a "do more with less" environment, some
organizations practically dispense with meetings; others have employees feeling
"meetinged to death." Either extreme is self-defeating in terms of optimal team
coordination and individual productivity. Consider these alternatives:

a) Morning Huddle - briefly get as many team members together in the
morning or just before the shift starts. Identify any looming surprises or
crises and areas of unfinished business, or whether a team member may need extra
support or backup coverage. This is a 5-10 minute "heads up," "all on the same
page" gathering. And if you add some humor -- "joke of the morning" -- it can
get the team off to a lively and cohesive start.

b) Communal Lunch - each Friday, one federal government branch would
have lunch together. Especially if employee hours are staggered, having more
than one opportunity to gather informally makes sense. For other units, Friday
afternoon pizza parties serve a similar function - informal "food for thought"
and laughs.

c) Chief's Cookout - twice a year the above head of the aforementioned
branch, invited team members to her house for a half-day "visionary" cookout.
(The food was real.) This mini-retreat setting helped the group maintain the
currency of their branch vision while creatively massaging vital "big picture"
goals and action plans.

4. Regular Systemic Parts-Whole Integration. At some regular interval the
teams and/or departments of the division, center or entire organization need to
congregate. The purposes include:

a) Installing Windows In the Silos - management sharing "big picture"
information, to help employees and units see their give-and-take connection or
disconnection with the whole, including the larger environment, e.g., a National
Institutes of Health (NIH) center having problems getting backing for grants
approval at the Institute Director level.

c) Matrix Teaming - from parts to whole, there must not simply be
top-down information flow unless in a state of urgency. (Remember, the urgent
must get done now, the important is negotiated and prioritized.) If time
constraints or meeting size prove unwieldy, then a matrix team comprised of a
small sample of department managers, supervisors and employees across varying
units should convene for task and process problem solving as outlined in the
above "Wavelength Segment."

5. Autonomy and Collaboration Among the Chiefs. Competing perspectives,
if not conflict, among top management or between the Executive Committee and the
Board of Directors is to be expected. Actually, it's probably needed to avoid
the greed and groupthink that has been fostering "irrationally exuberant,"
deceptive and criminal actions.

Too often, however, Executives deny or cover-up their own and/or colleagues'
performance inadequacies; or long-standing personality conflicts between some of
"The Big Five" (as I dubbed a federal agency Center Director, her Deputy and the
three Branch Managers) lead to communicational and problem solving inertia. Now
the status quo is triumphant. No one risks the conflict necessary to change and
rejuvenate a tired and outmoded operating system or leadership.

Of course, when the Board of Directors is basically a rubber stamp for the
CEO and the CEO is somewhat out of touch with employee discontent, then anger
will inevitably get acted out. In one non-profit organization, several staff
members frustrated with the Executive Director asked the head of the Personnel
Committee to have the Board vote to remove the Executive Director. (A meeting
between the Personnel head, staff members and Executive was bypassed.) A split
within the Board over the Director's fate led to tension and recriminations
within the Board, between the Board and Executive Committee, between Board and
staff and between Executive Director and the disaffected staff members. Not
surprisingly, both the board members siding with the Director and the loyal
staff members did not look favorably upon the staff and Personnel head that did
an end run on the Executive Director. It took six months of intense
Organizational Development intervention to help all segments work through the
hurt, anger and mistrust and to rejuvenate morale and productivity levels.

In conclusion, team coordination is critical at all levels/subsystems in the
organization -- from the frontline work group to the top Executive Management
Committee. Try instituting these five team building strategies: 1) Team Meeting
Paradigm Shift, 2) Build In a Wavelength Segment, 3) Plan Informal Gatherings,
4) Regular Systemic Parts-Whole Integration and 5) Autonomy and Collaboration
Among the Chiefs. Your company or agency will identify barriers to trust and
cooperation while transforming tension and conflict into productive and creative
collaboration. And, of course, these are strategies to help us all…Practice
Safe Stress!

Mark Gorkin, LICSW, "The Stress Doc" ™, an international speaker and
syndicated writer, is America Online's "Online Psychohumorist" ™ The Doc runs
his weekly "Shrink Rap and Group Chat" on AOL/Digital City. See his
award-winning, USA Today Online "HotSite" -- www.stressdoc.com
(recently cited as a workplace resource in a National Public Radio feature on
"Bad Bosses. Email for his monthly newsletter recently showcased on List-a-Day.com.
For more info on the Doc's "Practice Safe Stress" programs, email stressdoc@aol.com
or call 202-232-8662.